WarSclerotic

American message to Iran – Israel Opinion, Ynetnews.

Analysis: Sources close to Pentagon say US attack on Iran before elections would not hurt Obama’s chances

Washington has been hinting recently that President Obama and his aides are considering launching a pinpoint attack on Iran‘s nuclear installations even before the November 6 presidential elections.

An article suggesting this is the case was published in the credible Foreign Policy magazine, which has reliable sources within the administration.

Meanwhile, similar remarks are being heard from people who are close to the White House and the Pentagon. According to these sources, who currently visiting the Middle East, the US has a plan of action in place for an aerial bombardment of a number of Iranian nuclear sites, and the preparations for such an operation have already been completed.

According to one of the American sources, such an attack can be launched “at any moment.”

It is safe to assume that these statements and hints are aimed at making it clear to the Iranians that their foot-dragging on the nuclear issue may cost them dearly. The American government wants to let the Iranians know that if they continue to stall for time, the US may act even before the elections. An American strike on Iran would not hurt Obama’s chances of getting reelected because the full effect of the increase in the price of oil would not be felt until after the elections.

Iran’s Ahmadinejad watching military parade

Moreover, the American people tend to rally around their president in times of crisis, so even if Iran responds by attacking Israel and American targets in the Gulf, this would only help the Obama administration secure more votes. The Americans’ new stance is most likely the result of cooperation with Israel, which has improved significantly over the past few days, after it was almost non-existent before Netanyahu’s address at the UN General Assembly.

Meanwhile, the naval forces of the US and 12 other countries are conducting a mine-sweeping exercise in the Gulf. The deployment of a Patriotsurface-to-air missile battery in Haifa can be seen as part of the preparations for the joint Israeli-American military exercise, but it may also be a part of Israel’s preparations for a possible Iranian response to an American attack.

Patriot battery (Photo: Gil Nehushtan)

Needless to say, American news outlets are following this issue closely. An article by Newsweek’s Jerusalem-based reporter Dan Ephron, which focused on various “war game” scenarios, said that “although in recent weeks it has looked like Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is backing away from an attack, an October surprise cannot be ruled out. In some ways, the perception that an Israeli operation is no longer imminent makes the coming weeks a more appealing window for Netanyahu to order military action.

Yet, despite all this, it is safe to assume that the Americans would not have made their intention to strike Iran public had they actually reached a decision to do so. The American sources also mentioned that among EU countries and NATO security elements there is a strong opposition to an Israeli or American strike in Iran. Elements in India and other Asian countries also oppose a military operation against the Islamic Republic’s nuclear sites.

Iran: Think Tank Reports It Can Bomb Dimona – Middle East – News – Israel National News.

Dimona plant

Israel news photo: Flash 90

Iranian media say a U.S. think tank reports Tehran can strike the “Israeli nuclear complex at Dimona or the Israeli airbases without drawing the United States into a war.”

The state-controlled Fars News Agency reported Wednesday that “a group of U.S. presidential advisers at the Wilson Center warned that Iran could engage in at least token missile/rocket strikes against the attacker, targeting sites in Israel or U.S. facilities in the region.“

The advisers allegedly said that the Obama administration should avoid any military adventurism against Iran because it could backfire.

“According to unclassified estimates, Iran probably has at least two dozen and possibly more than 100 conventionally armed ballistic missiles capable of striking most of the region, including Israel,” the think tank was reported to have said.

Israel last week downed a drone, presumably launched by the Iranian-financed Hizbullah terrorist organization. The UAV may have been programmed to fly over the nuclear reactor near Dimona. Instead, it made a U-turn and flew over rural areas north of Be’er Sheva before being downed by a missile from an F-16 jet.

A visit to the Wilson Center site reveals that it is jointly sponsoring an event on Friday featuring businessman and author Khosrow B. Semnani, a former Iranian who has written “The Ayatollah’s Nuclear Gamble: the Human Cost of Military Strikes against Iran’s Nuclear Facilities.”

He has been quoted in TIME and The Atlantic that a military strike on Iran could cause thousands of fatalities.

The Wilson Center states, “The Middle East Program pays special attention to the role of women, youth, civil society institutions, Islam, and democratic and autocratic tendencies.”

Notably, Fars did not back up the report that it can strike Dimona but instead quoted others that Israel cannot successfully attack Iran and if it tries, it would meet “disaster.”

Fars also did not quote Semnani, who is the founder of the Omid [Hope] for Iran organization, which says it is “an initiative committed to improving the life of ordinary Iranians by serving as a collaborative platform for promoting individual freedom, empowering civil society and advancing good governance.”

“We are committed to defending Iran’s territorial integrity and sovereignty, to restoring Iran’s standing and prestige in the international community, and to promoting friendly relations between Iran and all nations,” the website states.

Semnani is a prominent philanthropist and industrialist based in Salt Lake City and designed and developed the Grassy Mountain facility, the first hazardous waste disposal facility in the State of Utah in 1980.

His research has detailed, scientific discussion of the human and environmental consequences of a military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, but he previously has not been quoted as having stated that Iran can strike Dimona and do so without prompting a military response by the United States.

The UAV Incursion: Are Gas Rigs The Next Target?.

Arie Egozi

9/10/2012

The flight of the Iranian UAV launched by Hezbollah has turned the issue of defending gas reserves in the Mediterranean Sea into a very pressing issue, say Israeli experts. Thus far, it appears that the primary threat to drilling rigs and future production rigs might come from the sea, in the form of explosive boats or a boat carrying armed terrorists.

Now, according to the experts, Hezbollah’s success in flying a UAV along Israel’s coast and then into the country’s airspace completely changes things. Some of the experts hold the opinion that the entire operation was mostly intended to examine the ability for early detection of UAVs. This was revealed to be lacking, since the UAV entered Israel’s airspace and flew within it for approximately half an hour.

In the past, Hassan Nasrallah has voiced threats directed at Israel’s gas reserves in the Mediterranean Sea. It seems that the UAVs he received from Iran were not intended for intelligence purposes, since he could obtain what he received from this UAV through Google Earth. One of the experts said that Hezbollah has no need for tactical intelligence, since its main weapons are rockets, which are mostly statistic weapons that do not require real-time intelligence information of the kind supplied by advanced UAVs.

According to the expert, the need for UAVs is for the purpose of harassing and attacking a large target such as a drilling or production rig. The new situation will required the diversion of many additional measures towards protecting the gas reserves in Israel’s economic waters.

It seems that the initial reinforcement will be in the detection system, which will have to be better adapted for improved detection of targets with a small radar signature. According to the experts, this refers to both radars as well as other sensors that can assist in early detection.

Azerbaijan jails 22 Iran-backed plotters against U.S., Israeli missions.

Tuesday, 09 October 2012

Iran has also been angered by Azerbaijan’s friendly ties to Israel. (Reuters)

  nShare

State Dept. officials: We didn’t link Libya attack to anti-Islam video | The Times of Israel.

Handling of Benghazi consulate assault becoming a major elections issue

A Libyan man investigates the inside of the U.S. Consulate, after an attack that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens on the night of Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2012, in Benghazi, Libya (photo credit: AP/Mohammad Hannon)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The State Department said Tuesday it never concluded that the consulate attack in Libya stemmed from protests over an American-made video ridiculing Islam, raising further questions about why the Obama administration used that explanation for more than a week after assailants killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans.

The revelation came as new documents suggested internal disagreement over appropriate levels of security before the attack, which occurred on the 11th anniversary of the Sept. 11 terror attacks on the U.S.

Briefing reporters ahead of a hotly anticipated congressional hearing Wednesday, State Department officials provided their most detailed rundown of how a peaceful day in Benghazi devolved into a sustained attack that involved multiple groups of men armed with weapons such as machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades and mortars over an expanse of more than a mile.

But asked about the administration’s initial — and since retracted — explanation linking the violence to protests over an anti-Muslim video circulating on the Internet, one official said, “That was not our conclusion.” He called it a question for “others” to answer, without specifying. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly on the matter, and provided no evidence that might suggest a case of spontaneous violence or angry protests that went too far.

The attack has become a major issue in the presidential campaign, featuring prominently in Republican candidate Mitt Romney’s latest foreign policy address on Monday. He called it an example of President Barack Obama’s weakness in foreign policy matters, noting: “As the administration has finally conceded, these attacks were the deliberate work of terrorists.”

The administration counters that it has provided its best intelligence on the attack, and that it refined its explanation as more information came to light. But five days after the attack, Obama’s ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, gave a series of interviews saying the administration believed the violence was unplanned and that extremists with heavier weapons “hijacked” the protest and turned it into an outright attack.

She has since denied trying to mislead Congress, and a concurrent CIA memo that was obtained by The Associated Press cited intelligence suggesting the demonstrations in Benghazi “were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo” and “evolved into a direct assault” on the diplomatic posts by “extremists.”

Alongside defining the nature of the Benghazi attack, Congress is looking into whether adequate security was in place.

According to an email obtained Tuesday by the AP, the top State Department security official in Libya told a congressional investigator that he had argued unsuccessfully for more security in the weeks before Ambassador Chris Stevens, a State Department computer specialist and two former Navy SEALs were killed. But department officials instead wanted to “normalize operations and reduce security resources,” he wrote.

Eric Nordstrom, who was the regional security officer in Libya, also referenced a State Department document detailing 230 security incidents in Libya between June 2011 and July 2012 that demonstrated the danger there to Americans.

Nordstrom is among the witnesses set to testify Wednesday before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. According to the panel’s chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and the head of a subcommittee, Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, the State Department refused repeated requests to provide more security for U.S. diplomats in Libya.

“You will note that there were a number of incidents that targeted diplomatic missions and underscored the GoL’s (government of Libya) inability to secure and protect diplomatic missions,” Nordstrom’s email stated.

“This was a significant part of (the diplomatic) post’s and my argument for maintaining continued DS (diplomatic security) and DOD (Department of Defense) security assets into Sept/Oct. 2012; the GoL was overwhelmed and could not guarantee our protection.

“Sadly, that point was reaffirmed on Sept. 11, 2012, in Benghazi,” he added.

Nordstrom said the incidents demonstrated that security in Libya was fragile and could degrade quickly. He added that Libya was “certainly not an environment where (the diplomatic) post would be directed to ‘normalize’ operations and reduce security resources in accordance with an artificial time table.”

Nordstrom also said diplomats in Libya were told not to request an extension of a 16-member special operations military team that left in August, according to an official of the Oversight panel. The official was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly and thus spoke only on the condition of anonymity.

The State Department has said it never received a request to extend the military team beyond August, and added that its members were replaced with a security team that had the same skills.

Democrats on the Oversight committee were sharply critical of Issa, the chairman, calling his investigation “extremely partisan.”

“The chairman and his staff failed to consult with Democratic members prior to issuing public letters with unverified allegations, concealed witnesses and refused to make one hearing witness available to Democratic staff, withheld documents obtained by the committee during the investigation, and effectively excluded Democratic committee members from joining a poorly-planned congressional delegation to Libya,” a Democratic memo said.

It said in the previous two years, House Republicans voted to cut the Obama administration’s requests for embassy security by some $459 million.

The Democratic memo said Nordstrom told committee investigators that he sent two cables to State Department headquarters in March and July 2012 requesting additional diplomatic security agents for Benghazi, but that he received no responses.

He stated that Charlene Lamb, the deputy assistant secretary for international programs, wanted to keep the number of U.S. security personnel in Benghazi artificially low and that Lamb believed the Benghazi facilities did not need any diplomatic security special agents because there was a residential safe haven to fall back to in an emergency.

Issa had a phone conversation Monday with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton about the committee’s investigation.

The FBI is still investigating the attack. Clinton also has named a State Department review panel to look into the security arrangements in Libya.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press.

U.S. Military Sent to Jordan on Syria Crisis – NYTimes.com.

By MICHAEL R. GORDON and ELISABETH BUMILLER

WASHINGTON — The United States military has secretly sent a task force of more than 150 planners and other specialists to Jordan to help the armed forces there handle a flood of Syrian refugees, prepare for the possibility that Syria will lose control of its chemical weapons and be positioned should the turmoil in Syria expand into a wider conflict.

The task force, which has been led by a senior American officer, is based at a Jordanian military training center built into an old rock quarry north of Amman. It is now largely focused on helping Jordanians handle the estimated 180,000 Syrian refugees who have crossed the border and are severely straining the country’s resources.

American officials familiar with the operation said the mission also includes drawing up plans to try to insulate Jordan, an important American ally in the region, from the upheaval in Syria and to avoid the kind of clashes now occurring along the border of Syria and Turkey.

The officials said the idea of establishing a buffer zone between Syria and Jordan — which would be enforced by Jordanian forces on the Syrian side of the border and supported politically and perhaps logistically by the United States — had been discussed. But at this point the buffer is only a contingency.

The Obama administration has declined to intervene in the Syrian conflict beyond providing communications equipment and other nonlethal assistance to the rebels opposing the government of President Bashar al-Assad. But the outpost near Amman could play a broader role should American policy change. It is less than 35 miles from the Syrian border and is the closest American military presence to the conflict.

Officials from the Pentagon and Central Command, which oversees American military operations in the Middle East, declined to comment on the task force or its mission. A spokesman for the Jordanian Embassy in Washington would also not comment on Tuesday.

As the crisis in Syria has deepened, there has been mounting concern in Washington that the violence could spread through the region. Over the past week, Syria and Turkey have exchanged artillery and mortar fire across Syria’s northern border, which has been a crossing point for rebel fighters. In western Syria, intense fighting recently broke out in villages near the border crossing that leads to the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon. To the east, the Syrian government has lost control of some border crossings, including the one near Al Qaim in Iraq.

Jordan has also been touched by the fighting. Recent skirmishes have broken out between the Syrian military and Jordanians guarding the country’s northern border, where many families have ties to Syria. In August, a 4-year-old girl in a Jordanian border town was injured when a Syrian shell struck her house, and there are concerns in Jordan that a sharp upsurge in the fighting in Syria might lead to an even greater influx of refugees.

Jordan, which was one of the first Arab countries to call for Mr. Assad’s resignation, has become increasingly concerned that Islamic militants coming to join the fight in Syria could cross the porous border between the two countries.

The American mission in Jordan quietly began this summer. In May, the United States organized a major training exercise, which was dubbed Eager Lion. About 12,000 troops from 19 countries, including Special Forces troops, participated in the exercise.

After it ended, the small American contingent stayed on and the task force was established at a Jordanian training center north of Amman. It includes communications specialists, logistics experts, planners, trainers and headquarters staff members, American officials said. An official from the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugee Affairs and Migration is also assigned to the task force.

“We have been working closely with our Jordanian partners on a variety of issues related to Syria for some time now,” said George Little, the Pentagon press secretary, who added that a specific concern was the security of Syria’s stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons. “As we’ve said before, we have been planning for various contingencies, both unilaterally and with our regional partners.”

Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta met in Amman in August with King Abdullah II of Jordan and at that time pledged continuing American help with the flow of Syrian refugees. Mr. Panetta was followed in September by Gen. James N. Mattis, the head of Central Command, who met with senior Jordanian officials in Amman.

Members of the American task force are spending the bulk of their time working with the Jordanian military on logistics — figuring out how to deploy tons of food, water and latrines to the border, for example, and training the Jordanian military to handle the refugees. A month ago, as many as 3,000 a day were coming over the border. But as the Syrian army has consolidated its position in southern Syria, the number of refugees has declined to several hundred a day.

According to the United Nations, Jordan is currently hosting around 100,000 Syrians who have either registered or are awaiting registration.   American officials say the total number may be almost twice that.

The American military is also sending medical kits to the border and has provided gravel to help keep down the dust at the Zaatari refugee camp, which the task force helped set up and is now home to 35,000 Syrians. It has also provided four large prefabricated buildings to be used at Zaatari as schools. One official estimated the cost so far at less than $1 million.

Insiders: Israel Will Attack Iran – NationalJournal.com.

By Sara Sorcher

October 9, 2012 | 8:00 p.m.

Massive US-Israel air defense drill set for Oc… JPost – Defense.

The Logistic Failures Will Not Be Repeated.

Amir Rapaport

5/10/2012

In July 2006, IDF troops operating in southern Lebanon near the end of the Second Lebanon War were looking for any way to quench their thirst. In an attempt to satiate this thirst, the troops drank stagnant water out of storage containers owned by Lebanese civilians, and even looted soft drinks from local stores. Any water bottle obtained was consumed immediately. Dehydration was only one problem in a long series of logistic failures throughout the Second Lebanon War.

“During the Second Lebanon War, there was no shortage of logistic items,” says Brigadier General Itzik Cohen, the head of the Logistics Branch at the IDF’s Technological & Logistics Directorate, in a special interview with IsraelDefense. “We had sufficient inventories of food, water, and ammunition. The problem was that the items did not reach the forces that needed them.”

Brig. Gen. Cohen is familiar with southern Lebanon. He grew up in Moshav Avivim, located right near the border. When he was seven years old, he was severely injured in a shooting attack when terrorists ambushed a bus carrying schoolchildren from the Moshav. Twelve schoolchildren and guardians were killed in the incident. To this day, Cohen has shrapnel embedded in his face. Despite this injury, Cohen eventually began his service in the IDF as a soldier in the Golani Infantry Brigade, and subsequently advanced to senior positions in the IDF’s logistics layout.

In the event of another war in Lebanon, will things be any different?

“Yes,” Cohen says emphatically.

The Failures of the Second Lebanon War

In an attempt to analyze the failures of IDF logistics during the Second Lebanon War, Brig. Gen. Itzik Cohen points out that the Logistics Branch he currently heads was disbanded only a few months prior to the war.

In the summer of 2006, the IDF disbanded the divisional logistic groups that were responsible for resupplying combat divisions. As in past wars, the operations of the divisional logistic groups was cumbersome, often got lost, and even mistakenly overtook armored columns or blocked important advance routes.

Another problem encountered during the Second Lebanon War was the failure of combat logistics – the forces on the ground advanced faster than the rate at which the logistic routes breached for them were laid. The food and water carried by combat troops for one or two days of combat operations was consumed long before supplies were delivered to them – if such deliveries were even made. Not to mention, the attempts to deliver supplies using ATVs and llamas – South American beasts of burden – were unsuccessful.

The issue of logistics, so it seemed, was of low priority for commanders, and the result was reports of hungry and thirsty troops deep inside hostile territory. In dire need of supplies, C-130 Hercules transporters paradropped supplies to the forces on the ground in SAM-infested areas. This dangerous operation put the pilots, aircraft, and equipment at risk. In some cases, the equipment was not dropped close enough to the IDF combat elements. In other incidents, equipment was dropped directly into the hands of Hezbollah.

According to Brig. Gen. Itzik Cohen, as part of the lessons from the war, not only did the IDF reestablish the GHQ Logistics Branch, but also resurrected the divisional logistic units (although in a reduced format compared to the divisional logistic groups disbanded prior to 2006). Each divisional logistic group now has 700-800 vehicles, compared to 1,200 vehicles used in the old divisional groups.

“After the Second Lebanon War, a structured process of drawing lessons and conclusions was put into effect. Maj. Gen. Dan Biton led this effort, first as head of the IDF GHQ Doctrine & Training Directorate, and subsequently as head of the Technological & Logistics Directorate,” explains Cohen.

A few months after the Second Lebanon War, the port of Ashdod in southern Israel was closed for a month to unload equipment and ammunition delivered to Israel to raise inventory levels, which had been mostly below the red line prior to the outbreak of hostilities.

“I estimate that 90% of the lessons of the war have been addressed very effectively. For example, following the war, operational competence indices were set for all of the logistic units, as was previously the norm only in the IAF. These indices are based on such criteria as the training standards of the forces, equipment quality, inventory levels, and more. In most units today, the level of competence is around 90%. Contrary to the practice that prevailed until 2006, in order to go below the red line, even for one specific item, the express authorization of an officer at the rank of general is required. Without such express authorization, no equipment may be issued from emergency inventories.

“We have covered a lot of ground with regards to the equipment of the reservist units as well. We are currently in the process of completing the replacement of personal gear and war-like stores in all units. Soldiers will never again arrive at the front lines without suitable gear.

“Most importantly, following the war, the Logistics Corps was removed from the responsibility of the Ground Forces Branch (to which it had been subordinate a short while before) and once again, became subordinate to the GHQ Logistics Directorate. In addition, we established unified responsibility in the field of logistics – from the GHQ to the level of the individual soldier.

“Beyond that, the logistics issue was incorporated in all IDF operational plans. Today, no plan is drawn and no exercise is conducted without fully incorporating logistics planning. During the Second Lebanon War, many IDF commanders did not consider logistic issues a part of their responsibility, mainly because they had become accustomed, over many years of low intensity combat operations in the territories, to a state where logistics support was delivered to them, all the way to the end units on the ground. Now, IDF commanders understand that as part of conducting combat operations, they must be responsible for logistic supplies on the ground, and that without logistics, their combat operations cannot be continued.”

What about opening logistic routes? Assuming that the rate of advance of the (combat) forces is faster than the rate at which the routes are opened, how will you deliver supplies to the ground forces?

“Today we have options of delivering supplies through aerial, land, and naval routes,” says Cohen. Though he did not wish to go into further detail, Cohen relates that a major share of the developments initiated by the IDF GHQ Technology & Logistics Directorate were intended to re-supply the forces through airlifting. Examples include the Flying Elephant project, a GPS-based unmanned paraglider undergoing development at Elbit Systems, portable water purification systems for forces in the field, and fire-proof diesel containers, which will be able to accompany tanks and bulldozers in combat, if necessary.

In the event of another war against Lebanon, logistics centers will endure heavier fire than that in 2006. How are you preparing for this?

“We understand that the threat has changed and that the fire we took in 2006 was only a sample compared to what we can expect in the event of another war, so we made the necessary adjustments.

“Among other things, we are conducting call-up exercises for reserve units under the assumption that the process will take place under heavy fire. We provided protection to the mobilization centers, dispersed our equipment and inventories throughout the country, and trained the logistics personnel to fight under fire. A part of our concept is to disperse the command posts as well. Each logistics command post that may come under attack has an alternative command post.

“Additionally, based on the assumption that the roads will come under fire, we developed a comprehensive command plan for the routes in cooperation with the Israeli Police, the Ministry of Transportation, the IDF Homefront Command, and other elements. Generally, the Technological & Logistics Directorate is fully responsible for the logistics of the IDF Homefront Command, and far-reaching changes were made in this field as well, based on the lessons learned from the Second Lebanon War.”

Senior IDF Source: Expect ‘Cast Lead 2’ – Defense/Security – News – Israel National News.

IDF soldiers enter Gaza in Cast Lead

Flash 90

After Hamas and Islamic Jihad co-signed a statement taking responsibility for the 55-rocket barrage fired into southern Israel over the Simchat Torah holiday, a senior IDF source said Israel has no choice but to launch a wide-scale military operation against Gaza.

The source told Maariv/NRG that the operation would include a large-scale ground incursion, not unlike the one undertaken in Operation Cast Lead in late 2008 and early 2009.

The joint statement by Islamic Jihad and Hamas regarding the rocket barrage is a rare occurrence, since the two terror organizations are considered to be hostile to each other, ever since Hamas took over Gaza in 2007.

A spokesman for Hamas’s “Kassam Brigades” said that the statement is “a sign of top level coordination between the factions in the face of the Israeli occupation.”